Nonetheless, in a bizarre “we lost, but we won” propaganda campaign, the deniers are pulling out all the stops to spin this new diagnosis as a rejection of both “sex addiction” and “porn addiction.” Their assertion is nonsensical, as:

Neither the ICD-11 nor the DSM5 ever use the word “addiction” to describe an addiction – whether it be gambling addiction, heroin addiction, cigarette addiction or you name it. Both diagnostic manuals use the word “disorder” instead of “addiction” (i.e. “gambling disorder” “nicotine use disorder”, and so on). Thus, “sex addiction” and “porn addiction” could never have been rejected, because they were never under formal consideration in the major diagnostic manuals. Put simply, there will never be a “porn addiction” diagnosis, just as there will never be a “meth addiction” diagnosis. Yet both pathologies can be diagnosed using the ICD-11’s provisions.

Nearly 41 recent neuroscience-based studies have been published on chronic porn users and those with CSB. All 41 report brain, neuropsychological, or hormonal alterations that mirror those seen in studies on substance addicts.

The following screenshot, circulating on pro-porn propagandist’s social media accounts (created by Nicole Prause), features the core piece of purported “evidence” that the ICD-11 “rejected sex addiction and porn addiction.” Excerpting a 2014 Jon Grant commentary, and counting on short attention-spans, the propagandists expect you to read only what’s in the red boxes, hoping you will overlook what the paragraph actually states:

If you fell for the red-box illusion, you misread the above excerpt as:

…pornography viewing… questionable whether there is enough scientific evidence at this time to justify its inclusion as a disorder. Based on the limited current data, it would therefore seem premature to include it in the ICD-11.

Yet that’s just a lie. Here’s the Jon Grant 2014 paper: Impulse control disorders and “behavioural addictions” in the ICD-11. Read the entire paragraph and you will see that Jon Grant is talking about “Internet gaming disorder”not pornography. Grant believed it was questionable whether there was enough scientific evidence at that time to justify Internet Gaming Disorder’s inclusion as a disorder:

A third key controversy in the field is whether problematic Internet use is an independent disorder. The Working Group noted that this is a heterogeneous condition, and that use of the Internet may in fact constitute a delivery system for various forms of impulse control dysfunction (e.g., pathological game playing or pornography viewing). Importantly, the descriptions of pathological gambling and of compulsive sexual behaviour disorder should note that such behaviours are increasingly seen using Internet forums, either in addition to more traditional settings, or exclusively 22,23. The DSM-5 has included Internet gaming disorder in the section “Conditions for further study”. Although potentially an important behaviour to understand, and one certainly with a high profile in some countries 12, it is questionable whether there is enough scientific evidence at this time to justify its inclusion as a disorder. Based on the limited current data, it would therefore seem premature to include it in the ICD-11.

Without reading only the red squares, the above excerpt reveals that Jon Grant believes that internet pornography viewing can be an impulse control disorder, and it falls under the umbrella diagnosis of “Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder” (CSBD). This is the exact opposite of the “red square” illusion tweeted by the propagandists.

Even if Jon Grant had actually said that compulsive porn use could not be classified under Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorders, it would be irrelevant as (1) the paper is over 4 years old, and (2) it’s just Grant’s two cents, not an official position paper by the World Health Organization. Moreover, a lot has changed in the intervening 4.5 years. By the way, Internet Gaming Disorder is now in WHO’s ICD-11, under addictive behaviors.

Compulsive sexual behavior (CSB), also referred to as sexual addiction or hypersexuality, is characterized by repetitive and intense preoccupations with sexual fantasies, urges, and behaviors that are distressing to the individual and/or result in psychosocial impairment.

Despite a few misleading rumors to the contrary, it is untrue that the WHO has rejected “porn addiction” or “sex addiction”. CSBD is an umbrella term that allows diagnoses of both “porn addiction” and “sex addiction” (as well as “hypersexuality” and “out-of-control sexual behavior”).

ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER DECEPTIVE TACTIC

The day after YBOP posted the above section, porn addiction denier Nicole Prause stopped tweeting the deceptive “red square” screenshot and replaced it with an equally deceptive GIF where you can watch Nicole Prause search for “addiction” in the ICD-11 search box. Sure enough, the ICD system gives a few returns of “addiction” related to a few drugs, etc. Prause then lies, saying, “To be clear, ICD does use the term “addiction” extensively, but they specifically reject the term “addiction” for use with sex (or sex films).” Screenshot of Prause’s search:

KEY POINT: while the the word “addiction” (in red above) appears when searching – that word is nowhere to be found once you click on a disorder for an addictive drug. For example, consider “Disorders due to alcohol use”:

Due to the fierce politics surrounding the inclusion of “Compulsive sexual behavior disorder,” it is, for now, categorized under “Impulse control disorder,” just as gambling once was. This is controversial, and may change in the future, as explained by ICD insiders in this World Psychiatry paper.